At a breakfast on Thursday in Washington, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, tried to tamp down a controversy that started when SenatorLindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, questioned the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which grants the right to citizenship to anyone born in the United States.America gives you something that is better than anything any other nation on Earth can give you, and that's the right to call yourself an American. Look very closely at the last paragraph:
“I am not aware of anybody who has come out in favor of altering the 14th Amendment,” Mr. McConnell said.
But Mr. Graham, speaking on Fox News last week, said it was “a mistake” to allow American-born children of illegal immigrants to become citizens automatically, a practice known as birthright citizenship. He said that along with a plan to grant legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, he would also amend the 14th Amendment as a way of discouraging future unauthorized immigration.
Throughout the week Mr. Graham stood firm on his proposal. “We can’t just have people swimming across the river having children here — that’s chaos,” he said Wednesday in another interview with Fox News.
The proposal caught Republican and Democratic lawmakers by surprise, not least because it came from Mr. Graham, who earlier this year was the leading — and almost the only — Republican negotiating with Democrats to create an immigration overhaul bill. Mr. Graham gave new prominence to an issue that has long been a favorite of conservatives advocating reduced immigration, but has been peripheral to the immigration debate in Congress.
Mr. McConnell said Republicans were calling only for hearings on the issue. The debate centers on the first sentence of what is known as the citizenship clause: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The amendment was adopted in 1868 to ensure the citizenship of the American-born children of freed slaves.
Opponents of birthright citizenship contend that illegal immigrants are not under United States jurisdiction, therefore their American-born children should not automatically be citizens. They say the amendment could not apply to those immigrants because there was no illegal immigration when it was adopted.
They say the amendment could not apply to those immigrants because there was no illegal immigration when it was adopted.I just want to shake my head and laugh.
There were no assault weapons then, either. This means we should ban them, right? I mean, let's apply some old-fashioned common sense here. If you believe in gun rights, as I certainly do, there's nothing more ridiculous than someone who says, well, you know, back in the olden times when Ben Franklin was president, he said that we should all have guns, but we didn't have like guns that shoot four thousand bullets a second so, you know...
The enticement for people to come to America has always been a free, open society that welcomes all comers. The idea that a woman could immigrate here and give birth on American soil is one that countless people have seen as their best reason to come here. We don't ask for papers in America. We give you freedom. And that kid of yours? Back in the old country, your child was a veritable indentured servant for life. Here, he or she is free.
Anyone who can't figure out that one does not take rights away from Americans is a fool.